“Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.” - C. S. Lewis
Good quality medical care is something everyone wants. As a result it is easy for governments to play a large role in healthcare. However bureaucratic rigidity and centralized power can lead to consequences that strip away personal sovereignty.
Recent articles in the BBC show a dangerous progression towards medical tyranny. A headline on the BCC website on January 16, 2024 stated “Covid jab skipped by 44%, entire UK study finds” here is a link to the article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-67980238
How did a study register the entire country? The research was conducted by the Lancet. The article notes: “In a first, health records for everyone over five in the UK were analysed.” Did citizens of the UK have the right to opt out of the study? Did they even know their medical records were being analyzed by a medical journal? Should they have the option to opt out of a study that is for the benefit of everyone?
The article quotes Professor Cathie Sudlow saying "We believe that we could and should extend these approaches to many other areas of medicine, such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes, to search for better understanding, prevention and treatment of disease."
All of the data is anonymized but how many people have access to it? One thing is clear. You have no private medical data if you use the NHS in the UK. Will the NHS eventually sell anonymized health data to research institutions?
This may not seem like a big concern but a government agency that controls your healthcare can have disastrous consequences. The story of Indi Gregory highlights this. For background see: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-67400915
Indi had been granted Italian citizenship in an attempt to preserve her life, but courts in the UK decided she had to die because it was the most compassionate thing for her. The wishes of her parents and the Italian government notwithstanding. In the name of compassion a life was ended. This approach robs a patient of a chance to live while new treatments are being developed or the chance to try experimental treatments. It also makes the state the final arbiter in choices of life and death. In ceding power of healthcare to government freedom is lost.
If a cost conscious government is trying to save money it may become cheaper to encourage death over prolonged treatments. Such decisions will be presented as a compassionate option. This brings us to state sponsored suicide. The BBC highlighted this issue in Canada in this article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64004329
A tyrant only has use for you while you are a benefit to the tyrant. Once your utility diminishes you are expendable. If medical tyranny is allowed to expand death will become the standard choice made as patient utility diminishes. Beware of medical tyranny.
Thomas Aquinas is credited as one of the greatest proponents of natural law. During his time in Cologne he was taught by Albertus Magnus. Magnus used the teachings of Aristotle in his mentorship of Thomas Aquinas.
Samuel Adams believed in American Independence from Great Britain. He is one of the most well know Son's of Liberty. On August 1, 1776 he gave a speech to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia.
“Lest the land become desolate and the Christian name be destroyed there, we exhort and command the faithful to take up the sign of the cross and bring aid to the Christians established in Livonia.”
Pope Gregory IX
During the time of Alexander Nevsky why were western Catholic powers seen as a greater spiritual threat than the Mongols?
The Golden Horde ruled the principalities of Russia. Noble Russians were still allowed to serve as the princes of the great cities, but they owed their power to the Horde. A tribute system was established and in practice in 1262.
Those who collected the tax were known as the Besermeny. The were usually Muslim merchants or tax farmers working for the Golden Horde. They were foreigners and they were collecting the wealth of the native Russians. This made them hated. Prior to 1262 the Horde conducted a census in Russia to determine exactly what tributes needed to be paid. This had been met with great hostility.
In 1262 the besermeny had great power. The Russian chronicle notes that they “created great violence among the people.” It seems clear that they were willing to abuse their power to accomplish their jobs. In addition to monetary contributions by 1262 the Russian population also had to contribute their men to fight in the wars of the Golden Horde. This further angered the local ...
